I caught The Ingraham Angle last night, for the first time, and was appalled. First, Ms. Ingraham appeared a little loopy, as though she were, well, high.

The woman was loud, shouting over her guests in an unedifying manner, just because she could; just because she had the microphone. Not once did Ms. Ingraham puncture a Guest’s attempts to speak with meaningful argument, as the great Tucker Carlson does.

Tucker listens, he doesn’t talk over someone unless that someone is babbling. And Tucker, flaws and all (for he’s not pure Old Right, but he’s the best we have), is very sharp. He pierces a Guest’s case with good argument. (And his spontaneous laugh is adorable.)

Ms. Ingraham, on the other hand, is all wrong. Unconservative, unthinking, and yesterday, plain dopey, grinning inanely.

In particular, during the segment about rap lyrics, Ingraham declared, un-conservatively, that she loved all music. A serious conservative might have distinguished music (based on objective elements of composition) from rap.

And a methodical thinker—there are none on Fox News—would understand that while in older, contemporary American music, popular composers were smart enough to write gorgeous lyrics—lyrics are not music.

Put it this way, if the greatest composer ever, Johann Sebastian Bach, set his divine, godly cantatas to the naught lyrics of Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, would I decry these sublime compositions as immoral? Of course not. The music would still be sublime.

Rap is BAD, and not only because of the filthy lyrics. Rap, simply put, is not music.

Conservative emphasis on lyrics is confused. First, separate music from lyrics. Then, make the conservative case that you cannot endorse rap qua music, because it isn’t music. Rap might be street theater, but music it isn’t. Then, as a side issue, add that rap theater and dance is set to filthy grunts and coitus-like movements.

That’s my own traditionalist case against rap. Ms. Ingraham, on the other hand, is a multiculturalist who loves all “music,” including some rap. And being a broadminded broad, she errs in considering rap to be music.

How do you know America is a matriarchy? Today, November 19, is International Men’s Day, 2017, and what is being discussed non-stop on the Mad Hatter Media? Women’s complaints against men—current complaints, past complaints, proven and unproven, possible future complaints, ethics committees to facilitate more complaints.

In years past, a token attempt at discussing “men’s health issues” would have been attempted on International Men’s Day. Now, with the help of men themselves, the day is devoted to vilifying The Male.

… the day has become something of a toxic punchline in a year filled with sexual assault allegations against major male figures — including President Donald Trump. It’s not been a banner year for men, as many in positions of power have been exposed as using that influence in cases of sexual harassment and assault. …

The country is becoming a farce, thanks to the dominance of unhinged females. Here’s a clue as to the uniquely American nature of the derangement: Other than in the UK, albeit to a lesser degree, where a similar kind of woman prevails, where in the world are nations wrestling with a manufactured crisis, elevated to a national level exclusively by women?

The state of sexual hysteria into which the US has been plunged is unique to the super neurotic, formerly puritanical, Anglo-American sphere.

Myron Robert Pauli: “Frankly, I can’t keep up with the pseudo-moralistic stuff which oscillates with zittebewegung (good German physics term about rapid oscillations) between libertine and puritanical faster than I can keep track. One can change sex but topless bathing is still banned. 17 year olds kissing need to be reported as child abusers in Oregon. Drone strikes on 1 of 16 florists not catering gay weddings must be considered but incest marriages (I thought marriage was “an economic agreement” not based on morality) must be prosecuted. Foreign criminal trespassers (sometimes called “undocumented citizens”) are entitled to taxpayer funded sex changes and partial birth abortions but don’t even THINK about “hugging with your baby in the last row of the balcony” (which will come up 40 years later!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvVtjaOnwog.”

UPDATED II (12/2):

When accusation of sexual abuse is all the proof you need: 'I believe these women,' Establishment Republicans keep intoning. These opportunists know it's political suicide to ask for due process for an accused or question any woman accuser. #RoyMoore

I’d like to better understand the conservative media’s orgy over Harvey Weinstein, the disgraced and disgraceful Hollywood film producer and studio executive who used his power over decades to have his way with starlets.

To listen to conservative talkers, the women affronted or assaulted by Weinstein were all Shakespearean talent in the making—female clones of Richard Burton (he had no match among women)—who made the pilgrimage to Sodom and Gomorrah in the Hollywood Hills, for the purpose of realizing their talent, never knowing it was a meat market. Watching the women who make up the dual-perspective panels “discussing” the Weinstein saga, it’s hard to tell conservative from liberal.

“Conservative” women now complain as bitterly as their liberal counterparts about “objectification.”

However, the female form has always been revered; been the object of sexual longing, clothed and nude. The reason the female figure is so crudely objectified nowadays has a great deal to do with … women themselves. By virtue of their conduct, women no longer inspire reverence as the fairer sex, and as epitomes of loveliness. For they are crasser, vainer, more eager to expose all voluntarily than any male. Except for Anthony Weiner, the name of an engorged organism indigenous to D.C., who was is in the habit of exposing himself as often as the Kardashians do.

The latter clan is a bevy of catty exhibitionists, controlled by a mercenary, ball-busting matriarch called Kris Kardashian. Kris is madam to America’s First Family of Celebrity Pornographers. (To launch a career with a highly stylized, self-directed sex tape is no longer even condemned.) Lots of little girls, with parental approval, look up to the Kardashians.

From Kim, distaff America learns to couch a preoccupation with pornographic selfies in the therapeutic idiom. Kardashian flaunts her ass elephantiasis with pure self-love. Yet millions of her admirers depict her obscene posturing online as an attempt to come to terms with her body. “Be a little easier on myself,” counsels Kim as she directs her camera to the nether reaches of her carefully posed, deformed derriere. While acting dirty and self-adoring, Kardashian delivers as close to a social jeremiad on self-esteem as her kind can muster. Genius!

Liberalism and libertinism are intertwined. The more liberal a woman, the more libertine she’ll be—and the more she’ll liberate herself to be coarse, immodest, vulgar and plain repulsive. Think of the menopausal Ashley Judd rapping lewdly about her (alleged) menstrual fluids at an anti-Trump rally. Think of all those liberal, liberated grannies adorning pussy dunce-caps on the same occasion. …

For once and for all, conservatives will have to reject outright the illness model of misbehavior if they want to hold on to their delicious outrage over Harvey Weinstein’s exploits.

If you’ve sexually assaulted individuals, you’ve committed a crime. You’re not sick; you’re just a SOB.

Sexual compulsion, like drug addiction, is a misbehavior, not a disease. It certainly does not compel crime. Human beings as moral agents are expected to control their impulses. If they don’t, you punish them. If they can’t; you have them locked up (after due process) for the protection of others .

There is a price for using the therapeutic idiom for crimes or misdemeanors. The price is the medicalization of misconduct. Punishment, then, becomes problematic. For if the offender is seen as without an ability to form the intent to harm—how do you justify punishing him?

Punish evil, don’t exculpate it. The idea of rehab for Harvey is as laughable as the notion that Harvey Sweinstein is deprived, rather than depraved.

Practice: Is this red-carpet celebrity “sick,” in need of a group hug, or just an exhibitionist and a slut? (Feminists will tell you she has the right to walk around like this and expect the Harveys of the world to behave around her. But that’s for another day.) Ol’ Harvey’s was not exactly surrounded by upstanding women. Hollywood hos are not as the sanctimonious Sean Hannity portrays them (“naive, innocent young things”).